東華大學圖書館 |

語系: 繁體中文

說明(常見問題)

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

登入

回首頁

切換: 標籤 | MARC模式 | ISBD

An empirical investigation to detect...

Anderson, Mary M.

FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases.

紀錄類型:	書目-電子資源 : Monograph/item
正題名/作者:	An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases./
作者:	Anderson, Mary M.
面頁冊數:	162 p.
附註:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-07, Section: A, page: 2626.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International66-07A.
標題:	Business Administration, Accounting. -
電子資源:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3184187
ISBN:	9780542255113

An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases.
Anderson, Mary M.

An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases. - 162 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-07, Section: A, page: 2626.

Thesis (D.B.A.)--Louisiana Tech University, 2005.

Normative decision theory describes the judgment and decision-making process as a cost/benefit analysis based upon maximum utility. One assumption of the theory is full rationality for choices made throughout the process. Due to bounded rationality, however, mental shortcuts become necessary. Use of these shortcuts does not necessarily diminish the quality of the decision. However, a suboptimal use of a heuristic results in a biased decision.

ISBN: 9780542255113Subjects--Topical Terms:

1020666
Business Administration, Accounting.

An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases.
LDR:03487nmm 2200325 4500 001 1821917
005 20061115130101.5
008 130610s2005 eng d
020 $a 9780542255113
035 $a (UnM)AAI3184187
035 $a AAI3184187
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Anderson, Mary M. $3 764033
245 1 3 $a An empirical investigation to detect the presence of confirmation bias in the decision-making strategies used by litigants in tax court memorandum cases.
300 $a 162 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-07, Section: A, page: 2626.
500 $a Adviser: Ted D. Englebrecht.
502 $a Thesis (D.B.A.)--Louisiana Tech University, 2005.
520 $a Normative decision theory describes the judgment and decision-making process as a cost/benefit analysis based upon maximum utility. One assumption of the theory is full rationality for choices made throughout the process. Due to bounded rationality, however, mental shortcuts become necessary. Use of these shortcuts does not necessarily diminish the quality of the decision. However, a suboptimal use of a heuristic results in a biased decision.
520 $a Kahneman and Tversky (1979) identify three basic heuristics: availability, representativeness, and anchoring and adjusting. One suboptimal use of the anchoring and adjusting heuristic, confirmation bias, is the unconscious search for and evaluation of information that confirms one's desired decision outcome while ignoring disconfirming information. In an adversarial legal contest, relying on biased research diminishes the probability of prevailing (Johnson 1993).
520 $a The intent of this research inquiry is to use archival data to test for the presence of confirmation bias in the defenses presented by the litigants in Tax Court Memorandum Opinions. The data sample consists of the briefs presented to the Court by both litigants, taxpayer and Internal Revenue Service, in 106 of the 288 rendered Memorandum Decisions in 2004.
520 $a Summary statistics from the data show that 51.85% of taxpayers represent themselves (i.e., pro se) in the contentious proceedings. The remaining taxpayers employ tax professionals to provide the defense. The IRS has a contingent of legal counsel to present their position. Non-parametric statistical testing provides evidence that defenses presented by pro se taxpayers show more bias than defenses provided by tax professionals. In turn, taxpayers' professional representatives present more biased defenses than do the IRS professional representatives.
520 $a This research inquiry adds external validity to the extant literature on biased research recommendations resulting from the tax research task. That is, numerous identified incentives promote susceptibility to the use of confirmatory decision-making strategies. As shown in this study, incentives impact practitioners differently than government employees. Remedial measures, including education, task-specific experience, and accountability can reduce this proclivity. Pro se taxpayers, with no legal education, experience, or accountability, show a greater degree of bias in their defenses than do tax professionals.
590 $a School code: 0109.
650 4 $a Business Administration, Accounting. $3 1020666
650 4 $a Law. $3 600858
690 $a 0272
690 $a 0398
710 2 0 $a Louisiana Tech University. $3 1018729
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 66-07A.
790 1 0 $a Englebrecht, Ted D., $e advisor
790 $a 0109
791 $a D.B.A.
792 $a 2005
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3184187